|
|
|
Conviction and sentence upheld in Palin email case
Court Watch |
2012/01/30 03:14
|
A federal appeals court panel has upheld the conviction and sentence of a University of Tennessee student in the hacking of Sarah Palin's email in 2008.
The three judge panel in a Monday decision affirmed the conviction of 24-year-old David Kernell. A Knoxville jury last April convicted Kernell of unauthorized access to a protected computer and destroying records to impede a federal investigation.
Kernell's attorney, Wade Davies, contended at trial that Kernell had no criminal intent and that guessing his way into the email account was a prank. Palin was governor of Alaska and John McCain's GOP running mate at the time.
Kernell was released in November after serving less than 11 months.
Davies said he will seek a review by the full U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eugene Criminal Defense - MJM Law Office, P.C.
Attorney News |
2012/01/29 13:13
|
MJM Law Office, P.C. was founded to provide clients with quality representation in criminal defense and family law, including matters such as DUI offenses, drug crimes, divorce, and child custody.
Mr. Mizejewski understands that effectively working through the legal system is a challenging process. MJM Law Office, P.C. works closely with clients to understand and resolve their issues, taking the time to listen to and understand each client's unique situation, and explain the available options.
Located in the heart of downtown Eugene, Oregon, MJM Law Office, P.C. focuses on serving clients in Lane County, Oregon. We are in the Lane County Circuit Court on a near daily basis, and are very familiar with the individual judges, district attorneys and court staff.
http://www.mjmlawoffice.com/criminal-law
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court denies new trial in Wis. mill worker death
Court News |
2012/01/27 09:10
|
A Wisconsin appeals court on Thursday denied the request for a new trial made by a man convicted in the grisly 1992 killing of a Green Bay paper mill worker.
Rey Moore, 65, was one of six men convicted of killing their co-worker Tom Monfils. His body was found in a pulp vat at the then-James River Corp. plant in Green Bay with a weight tied around his neck.
Moore's attorney, Byron Lichstein, of the Wisconsin Innocence Project, argued that the conviction should be overturned because of questionable testimony by prison inmate James Gilliam.
He had testified in 1995 that Moore told him he participated in a group beating of Monfils at the mill. But Gilliam later recanted and said Moore told him he actually tried to prevent the beating.
That change in Gilliam's testimony was not allowed at the trial. Lichstein argued that Moore deserved a new trial because that testimony would exonerate him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Action Suit
Securities Class Action |
2012/01/26 12:42
|
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP today announced that a class action has been commenced on behalf of an institutional investor in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas on behalf of purchasers of Collective Brands, Inc. common stock during the period between December 1, 2010 and May 24, 2011.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Darren Robbins of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at djr@rgrdlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/collectivebrands/. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
The complaint charges Collective Brands and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Collective Brands is the holding company for three lines of business: Payless ShoeSource (“Payless”), Collective Brands Performance + Lifestyle Group (“PLG”), and Collective Licensing. The Company was formerly known as Payless ShoeSource, Inc. and changed its name to Collective Brands in August 2007.
The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and financial results. As a result of defendants’ false statements, Collective Brands stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $23.44 per share on February 18, 2011.
On May 24, 2011, after the market closed, the Company announced its financial results for its first fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2011. The Company reported earnings of $26.4 million or $0.42 diluted earnings per share for the first quarter, which was nearly 50% less than the $0.82 diluted earnings per share expected by analysts. The Company further reported that net sales declined 1.1% to $869.0 million, due in substantial part to the Company’s 7.4% comparable store sales decline in its Payless domestic segment, offset by sales growth of 22.5% in PLG. On this news, Collective Brands stock collapsed $3.06 per share to close at $15.31 per share on May 25, 2011, a one-day decline of nearly 17%.
According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) the Company’s inventory level for Payless remained at excessively high levels and aging inventory for its Payless segment was a concern; (b) sales at the Company’s flagship Payless stores were significantly worse than expected due to deteriorating customer demand; and (c) the Company was forced to mark down Payless’s bloated inventory at significant discounts, which adversely affected the Company’s margins and financial results for its first quarter.
Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Collective Brands common stock during the Class Period (the “Class”). The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud.
http://www.rgrdlaw.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NY court: Judge can't block $18B Ecuador judgment
Court Watch |
2012/01/26 02:42
|
A judge overstepped his authority when he tried to ban enforcement around the world of an $18 billion judgment against Chevron Inc. for environmental damage in Ecuador, a federal appeals court said Thursday as it explained why it lifted the ban last year.
The three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the judge has authority to block collection if Ecuadorean plaintiffs move against Chevron in New York, but law does not give him authority "to dictate to the entire world which judgments are entitled to respect and which countries' courts are to be treated as international pariahs."
The judgment came last February after nearly two decades of litigation that stemmed from the poisoning of land in the Ecuadorean rainforest while the oil company Texaco was operating an oil consortium from 1972 to 1990 in the Amazon. Texaco became a wholly owned subsidiary of Chevron in 2001.
Chevron obtained an order from U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan last March blocking Ecuadorean plaintiffs from trying to collect the $18 billion until he could stage a trial to determine if the judgment was obtained fairly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Investment Fraud Litigation |
|
|
|
|
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
|
|
|
| |
| |
| |
|
The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
